Latin American art exists, just as there is Asian, African and European, although certain curators and critics transnationalized want to deny it, because of the inability to see the constancy of its changing plural identity and that abundant signification that in it acquire the international standards, or to be faithful to a pragmatic dependence on external powers and market interests.
But it is not a uniform type of art, where only the unitary component of the common regional geography prevails, nor can it be reduced to a sum of modalities confined to the traditional codes of expression derived from autochthonous syncretized and renewed cultures. Its nature of art in movement implies the existence of an immense complex of expressions - in varied supports and with numerous materials and methods - that manifest in a different way (very coherent with each nationality, culture, circumstance and personality) the assimilation of aesthetics Classical, modern and postmodern, or derived from that amalgam of narrow roads to the term-wild-card “contemporary art.”
Was not this planetary force, translated by the pictorial images of a group of fundamental representatives of modern Latin American aesthetics, what in the eighties and nineties made way for them in auction houses and American and European collections, turning them into high financial values?
And was it not the wealth of creative peculiarities of the artists born in these islands and continental spaces that signify us, projected through venues renewing biennials and experimental centers of visual culture, which has also had an impact on the opening of codes that broaden the domains of today's art?
Latin American art does exist.